Santorum for President ping. Let me know if you want on or off the list.
Top 10 Reasons why Conservatives should support Santorum
Posted on 01/05/2012 9:51:11 AM PST by SeekAndFind
What does a narrow second-place finish get you in national polling? A solid bounce to second place, if you’re Rick Santorum. The latest Rasmussen national poll puts Santorum firmly into the top tier:
Former U.S. Senator Rick Santorum, coming off his photo finish with Mitt Romney in the Iowa caucuses, is now in second place among Republican voters in the race for the party’s 2012 presidential nomination.
The news for the rest of the field, save Mitt Romney, is less than stellar:
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey, taken the night after the caucuses, shows Romney again in first place with support from 29% of Likely Republican Primary Voters, followed by Santorum with 21%. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who led the pack in late November with 38% of the vote, now runs third with 16%. Texas Congressman Ron Paul, the third place finisher in Iowa, picks up 12% of the vote, up from eight percent (8%) in the previous survey.
The two remaining Republicans in the race, Texas Governor Rick Perry and former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman, each earn four percent (4%), marking essentially no change from late November.
Santorum rose 17 points in the last month, rocketing to the position of the latest Not-Romney as support for past holders of that position dwindled substantially. But he’s not the only one benefiting from a surprisingly good performance in Iowa. Romney’s stock has risen by 12 points in the same period. His favorability has barely changed, from 67% to 68% over that time, so it appears that Romney may have benefited from the exodus from Gingrich. Gingrich, bt the way, has dropped nineteen points in favorability in the last few weeks since the previous survey, a precipitous fall that explains his current position in the field.
Rick Perry may have decided to keep going to South Carolina, but he won’t get much of a lift from this survey. He’s in the exact same position as in late November, even with Michele Bachmann out of the race. Interestingly, Ron Paul has fallen to fourth place but has more support at 12% than he did tied for third at 8% in the last survey.
Rasmussen’s sample looks pretty solid, with 73% Republicans and 27% independents among 1,000 likely primary voters. The internals of this poll look pretty good for Romney, however. He and Santorum finish first and second among men (29/19), women (30/24), and every age demo except 18-39YO, which goes Romney/Paul 34/18, which is bad news for Paul — although Rasmussen has consolidated its traditional age demos into fewer categories, it should be noted. Santorum gets a third of “very conservative” voters, with Gingrich in second (33/25) and Romney in third at 18%. It’s Romney/Santorum among “somewhat conservative” voters (33/21), thouggh, and Romney/Paul (36/17) among “other”. Romney’s still winning the independents at 25%, with four candidates tying for second place, as well as the Republicans, 31/23 over Santorum in second place.
It looks like Santorum’s bounce is both wide and deep, but not enough to overpower Romney, at least not in a crowded field.
“It looks like Santorum’s bounce is both wide and deep, but not enough to overpower Romney, at least not in a crowded field.”
He’s suddenly emerged on the national stage. The next debates and next two primaries will be critical.
Talk about peaking at the right time - I suggest all who can and are so inclined donate today!
Its got to bug team Romney that they can’t get any traction. haha
Ping.
Do you still hold to this belief you expressed yesterday, or are you through exploring the Nile?
“It looks like Santorum’s bounce is both wide and deep, but not enough to overpower Romney, at least not in a crowded field.” yeah with Crying, Whining Losermen ...
Sadly, it looks like Perry is out.
I’ll rally around Santorum, not Newt.
"If you're a conservative, there really is only one place to go right now. I would even argue farther than that. If you're a Republican, if you're a Republican in the broadest sense, there is only one place to go right now and that's Mitt Romney." –Rick Santorum, 02/1/2008 [source]Some additional points from here:
“I came to the House as a real deficit hawk, but I am no longer a deficit hawk. I’ll tell you why. I had to spend the surpluses. Deficits make it easier to say no.” –Rick Santorum, 02/5/2003 [source]
"One of the criticisms I make is to what I refer to as more of a libertarianish Right. They have this idea that people should be left alone, do whatever they want to do, government should keep our taxes down and our regulations low, that we shouldn't get involved in the bedroom, that we shouldn't get involved in cultural issues. That is not how traditional conservatives view the world." –Rick Santorum, 08/04/2005 [source]
"Don’t give me this idea — I hear this: ‘Oh, you’re a moralist. You’re trying to impose your values.’ Everybody’s trying to impose their values. That’s what America’s about." –Rick Santorum, 12/29/2011 [source]
- #1 most lobbied member of Congress in 2006.
- Wrote an article in 2008 titled Vote For Foreign Aid.
- Endorsed pro-abortionist Arlen Specter who has a 0% NRLC rating.
- Has argued for a position of 'touchback amnesty' and advocates increased immigration levels.
- A prolific supporter of earmarks, having requested billions of dollars for pork projects in Pennsylvania while he was in Congress. Perhaps recognizing the sign of the times, Santorum finally reversed his position in 2010, saying that he was opposed to them , but one must remain skeptical about his sincerity. As recently as 2009, he said, “I’m not saying necessarily earmarks are bad. I have had a lot of earmarks. In fact, I’m very proud of all the earmarks I’ve put in bills. I’ll defend earmarks.”Also see: Rick Santorum the Pro-Life Statist
- An examination of his scores in the NTU rating of Congress shows that Santorum compiled a very strong record on taxes and spending in the first four years of each of his two Senate terms, then a sharp swing to below the Senate Republican average in the Congress before his reelection campaign.
- In the 2003-2004 session of Congress, Santorum sponsored or cosponsored 51 bills to increase spending, and failed to sponsor or co-sponsor even one spending cut proposal. In his last Congress (2005-2006), he had one of the biggest spending agendas of any Republican -- sponsoring more spending increases than Republicans Lisa Murkowski, Lincoln Chafee and Thad Cochran or Democrats Herb Kohl, Evan Bayh and Ron Wyden.
- Santorum also supported raising congressional pay at least three times, in 2001, 2002, and 2003.
- He voted NO on raising the minimum wage in 1995 and 2005. But on the same day he voted NO in 2005, he sponsored an amendment that would increase the minimum wage, which he later boasted about to skeptical voters in a 2006 campaign brochure he released called “50 Things You Didn’t Know About Rick Santorum.”
- In the same “50 Things” campaign brochure, Santorum boasts about sponsoring a bill to regulate “price gouging and unfair pricing by the big oil companies.” This contradicts his opposition to a “windfall profits tax” that Democrats tried to impose on oil companies in 2005. He also voted YES on Sarbanes-Oxley, which was an overreaching bill that tried to tighten accounting regulations following the Enron scandal.
- Voted YES in 2003 for Medicare Part D / Prescription Drug Benefit mandate.
- Voted YES for airline bailouts in 2001.
- Voted YES for the 1996 anti-gun Lautenberg Amendment which strips citizens of gun ownership rights if convicted of certain misdemeanors.
- Voted for the Gun Manufacturers Liability Act of 1994 prohibiting the sale of hand guns with safety devices.
- Voted against Death Tax repeal in 2003.
- Voted for the federal regulation of farms requiring that large farms construct animal waste treatment facilities.
- Voted YES for Bushs' No Child Left Behind and other national testing initiatives.
- Voted for affirmative action (later voted against it).
- Voted for Minimum Wage increases (Flipped on this several times).
- Voted for federal funds for military operations in Bosnia.
- Voted to cut Trident II D-5 missiles several times.
- Voted against the elimination of the National Endowment for the Arts funding numerous times.
- Voted to seize private property to designate 7 million acres of Cal. desert as a wilderness area.
- Voted against the first amendment and for lobbying restrictions and regulations.
- Voted for the Motor Voter law several times.
- Voted to limit Striker Replacement of union thugs.
- Voted on the FY 94 Clinton budget, which contained at that time the largest tax increase in U.S. history.
- Voted against SDI several times.
- Voted against Hunter amendment that sought to require the Defense Department to ask individuals entering the armed forces if they are homosexuals. (He later switched to the more conservative position on this).
- Voted against school choice early in his career. (He later switched to the more conservative position on this).
- Voted against both the 1991, 1992 spending freeze and voted for numerous large Bush II Budgets.
- Voted for tabaco tax increases (1998).
- Voted against the exemption of banks with assets of less than $250 million from the 1977 Community Reinvestment Act (1998).
- Voted for the Chemical Weapons Treaty of 1997 that the ACU said, "violated U.S. constitutional protections against unreasonable search and seizure, ceded U.S. national sovereignty to international agencies, and threatened U.S. defense forces".
- Voted for Kassenbaum amendment to the Ryan White Reauthorization which allowed for funds to be used to promote homosexuality or intravenous drug use.
- Voted for the 2005 highway bill that included thousands of wasteful earmarks, including the Bridge to Nowhere.
- Voted to continue funding the Bridge to Nowhere rather than send the money to rebuild New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina.
- Sponsored a bill to extend milk subsidies in 2005, which he claimed he did to “save countless Pennsylvania dairy farmers.”
Are you going to post this Santorum dossier on every Santorum thread?
If so, what about doing the same research on other candidates (e.g. Ron Paul)?
Well looks like McCain took Santorum's advice and endorsed the Mittens
We got screwed again. Didn't learn anything from 08.
Same here.
Why was it removed? You just posted what he was quoting as saying.
In addition, the Return of “Nasty Newt”, will not help his poll numbers. The dogfight that Nasty Newt and Romulus engage in will help Santorums numbers even more.
Nasty Newt will finish 4th in NH, as well.
OK, so you know the flaws of ALL the candidates, Obama included...
Which of these candidates is most acceptable to you (warts and all), or are you going to sit this election out?
Go Rick!
Pretty amazing that Santorum has moved from almost nowhere in national polls to 21% in only a couple of weeks. It’ll be interesting to see how that translates into votes through NH, SC, and Florida.
The Romney campaign is like the big heavily armored Tiger Tank on the battlefield. It is going to pulverize anyone or anything that gets in its way. It has all the major funding, endorsements, discipline and organization it needs to secure the nomination.
The Non-Romneys scramble from one candidate to the next. First Bachmann, then Perry, then Cain, then Gingrich, and now Santorum. All Romney has to do is divide and conquer. Gingrich is self imploding with his his infantile ego and burning desire for revenge. But all he will succeed in accomplishing is helping Romney by taking conservative votes away from Santorum.
The same story will repeat in South Carolina. If the non-Romneys are divided up between Perry, Gingrich, and Santorum Romney will slip through again and then go on to win in more friendly territory like Florida and Nevada. After that it’s over. Romney will win most of the big states and the Western states with large LDS populations.
The only way to stop Romney would be for folks like Gingrich and Perry to pull out and throw their support to Santorum. But even that is no guarantee as Ron Paul will stay in until the end.
Santorum is more than the latest Not-Romney. He is also the Not-Gingrich. And as voters come to conclude that they have an alternative to Gingrich that is also Not-Romney, I think they will flock to him (i.e., Santorum).
The major knock on Santorum all along was the idea that "he can't win." If he loses that, he could catch fire quickly.
One of the major selling points for Gingrich was that "he can win." If he loses that, he could bottom out quickly.
quote “The only way to stop Romney would be for folks like Gingrich and Perry to pull out and throw their support to Santorum. But even that is no guarantee as Ron Paul will stay in until the end.”
um... surely you mean Santorum and Perry should drop out and support Gingrich. Gingrich is the only one in the race that can stop Romney. That’s just a fact.
Already did! Go Santorum!!!
Santorum is unlikeable, with no executive experience, no money, and no chance at beating Romney. Santorum’s bubble will burst momentarily and we can get back to the serious race between Gingrich and Romney.
Anyone who fails to understand that Santorum is not only Not-Romney, but more importantly to his political success, NOT-GINGRICH is going to underestimate the depth and breadth of Santorum’s support.
Also I believe it will help Santorum that many of his new supporters will be happy (happier) if they can even just get him on the ticket as Vice President. IOW, it doesn’t seem to be discouraging support if that’s the outcome.
I’m still awaiting your Obama dossier.
Surely you want him vetted, don’t you?
It's hard to have a serious discussion over a post where many of the claims are not substantiated with links.
Just gave to Santorum.
As long as Paul is in then it is better to have Gingrich around attacking Paul and Romney or just Romney. That way it won’t fall on just Santorum to go after Paul and Romney. He won’t be able to attack both guys. Gingrich must become the attack dog for Santorum. Then drop out when Santorum is beating Romney and endorse.
Newt Gingrich: Hillary Clinton ‘Terrific’ Defense Secretary
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2010/11/newt-gingrich-hillary-clinton-terrific-defense-secretary/
Newt: Hillary Is the ‘Most Effective’ Candidate
http://archive.redstate.com/stories/elections/2008/newt_hillary_is_the_most_effective_candidate
Newt: Hillary shows courage, integrity
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0108/7851.html
Oddly, Hillary and, Yes, Newt Agree to Agree
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/13/nyregion/13hillary.html
Newt & Nancy....Gorebull Warming
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=a0f_1322697042&comments=1
Newt Gingrich Al Sharpton Education Tour
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4UPuhr8eqn0
Political Chameleon Newt Gingrich Has a History of Working with Democrats
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/12/02/political-chameleon-newt-gingrich-has-a-history-of-working-with-democrats.html
Right to Life -
Asked in an interview on the CBS News program “Face the Nation,” whether he agreed with Republicans who oppose Federal abortion payments in cases of rape or incest or to protect the life of a mother, Mr. Gingrich said: “No. First of all, I think you should have funding in the case of rape or incest or life of the mother, which is the first step.”
http://rightonlife.org/2011/11/24/pro-life-groups-should-say-no-to-newt-and-pooh-pooh-perry-2/
Self Defense -
“In 1996, Newt Gingrich turned his back on guns and voted for the anti-gun Brady Campaign’s Lautenberg Gun Ban, which strips the Second Amendment rights of citizens involved in misdemeanor domestic violence charges or temporary protection orders –- in some cases for actions as minor as spanking a child or grabbing a spouse’s wrist.(1)”
http://www.nationalgunrights.org/the-inconvenient-truth-about-newt/
Newt has since had a “converstion to Catholicism” (conversion of convenience just in time for an election) and is nothing more than a flip-flopping RINO, just like Mitt Romney.
On the whole, Rick Santorum’s record on economic issues in the U.S. Senate was above average. More precisely, it was quite strong in some areas and quite weak in others. He has a strong record on taxes, and his leadership on welfare reform and Social Security was exemplary. But his record also contains several very weak spots, including his active support of wasteful spending earmarks, his penchant for trade protectionism, and his willingness to support large government expansions like the Medicare prescription drug bill and the 2005 Highway Bill.
Funny how you left that out - that he also had a lot of positives.
And Santorum isn't even my first choice, I'm still leaning towards Newt. But I'm getting sick of these hack attacks on the conservative candidates.
“I’ll rally around Santorum, not Newt.”
I’ll take either. Anyone but Romney. If Newt Really does focus his fire on Romney to destroy his bid, that really does wash away the Pelosi and Scozzafava stink for me.
I will be happy to rally around Santorum, at the proper time, but we’re not there yet, so I am with NEWT GINGRICH and plan to stay with NEWT GINGRICH because I truly believe he will make the best president and by far, the superior CIC!
GO NEWT!
the vote is going to be split until AFTER the SC primary results come in.. you’ll know then what anti Romney candidate of the 3(Perry, Gingrich or Santorum) gets to go at Romney alone
The day after South Carolina will be the day of reckoning, IMO, as the conservatives cannot go into winner-take-all Florida in a position to deliver all of those delegates to Romney by default because they ended up dividing up the anti-Romney conservative vote into too many slices.
If accurate, how does this vary in any substantive way from Gingrich’s record and his conduct after leaving office?
That means that exactly half the voters still prefer a candidate other than these two. If and when Gingrich and Perry give up the fight, their supporters are far more likely to switch to Santorum than to Romney. Maybe Mittens picks up Huntsman's little piece of the pie. As for Ron Paul--if he doesn't play Third Party Spoiler--it would seem unlikely to me that his supporters would jump from the non-establishment favorite to the establishment favorite. Are we really going to break out the circular firing squad again, like we did in 1996 and 2008?
how’d the nice Newt end up polling in Iowa after all the negative ads went unchallenged by the “nice” Newt?
What will Faux News stooge Scott Rasmussen say when
Newt Gingrich stomps both Romney and Santorum in SC? Chances are he’ll ignore it after being given orders from
Faux News to report nothing bad about Romney and nothing good about Gingrich. Santorum or Romney don’t stand a prayer of winning SC.
How about THIS for Santorum’s message? Milt appointed 75% DEMOCRATS to the judiciary during his reign as governor. (27 of 36!!) Is there ANY reason for a Republican to support Romney? No, and this knowledge could mean the final nail in Milt’s political coffin. Bob
That one really bugs me, unless Santorum makes it clear that he thinks the level of government that should be addressing those issues is state/local, so it'll be irrelevant to his Presidency. And really, the idea that he thinks the government should be involved in the bedroom is kind of scary. Usually, that's the kind of accusation the left makes against conservatives, and conservatives respond "no, we don't care what you do in your bedroom, but we do care what you do outside it." But Santorum is going all-in on that one, and it kind of creeps me out.
I suppose Santorum is correct in the sense of pushing strict "conservatism", but that's not the kind of Reagan conservatism I tend to support.
Unfortunately, our choices are getting pretty darn limited at this point. It's pretty much the Game Show Host, The Nutty Professor, The Crazy Uncle, or John Lithgow from Dirty Dancing with a pole up his_______. Wonderful. I've got the Professor and Lithgow 1-2 at this point, but I'm sure not happy about it.
Dick Morris said something significant yesterday on Hannity's show:
"Rick Santorum is the most honorable politician I know".
With Morris, you have to consider the source, of course. But still...
That is a particularly meaningful statement -- one that should have every conservative's antennae quivering.
Santorum did as well as he did because Mittens didn’t have a chance to destroy him with attack ads. If he had risen in the polls two weeks earlier he would have ended up with around 5% of the vote. The Santorum “surge” is an abberation. Not to be taken seriously. He’ll get destroyed in NH and SC and will drop shortly after and endorse Newt.
I will tell you why I support Gingrich.
I honestly think every Republican in the race except Paul (yes... even Romney could do a decent job of managing things IF things were fine.
BUT, things are NOT fine!
We are in a crisis that nearly no one living has experienced, and this is no time for half measures. We need RADICAL change, or America, western civilization, and Christendom itself may crumble. I believe Newt Gingrich to be possibly the only man alive that could MAYBE have a shot at fixing our problems.
For the sake of all we hold precious, vote for Newt.
Rasmussen poll of 1,000 likely primary voters surveyed after the Iowa Caucus:
Romney – 29%
Santorum – 21%
Gingrich – 16%
Paul – 12%
Perry – 4%
Huntsman – 4%
Freddie Newt is finished. His negative attacks on Romulus(which I like) will help Samtorum(which I like).
Nasty Newt’s negative attacks will allow Santorum to take
the higher ground. So Newtbots, I encourage you to keep
sending your money to Newt. Santorum will benefit.
I would tend to agree, but that’s the call of the individual candidates, not ours. It’ll be up to them to drop out. Perry elected to stay in after only 12 short hours of reassessment or consideration, even though it’s my understanding that he can’t participate in the SC debate because he didn’t place in the top four in Iowa. I think that’s okay with him, since debates aren’t his strong suit and given that both Gingrich and Santorum are Catholic, Perry might do very well in SC as the only Evangelical in the race. IOW, despite, NH, South Carolina could be wide open, too.
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.