I guess it depends upon what the meaning conservatives is.
Posted on 03/09/2012 7:06:50 AM PST by SeekAndFind
Saying he'd look for a "strong and principled conservative" as a running mate should he win the Republican presidential nomination, former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum tells Newsmax that he certainly would consider rival Newt Gingrich for that vital role.
When asked if he would consider the former House Speaker as number two on his ticket, Santorum said Gingrich had been "tested" by the bruising GOP race and that makes him an attractive vice presidential candidate.
Santorum tells Newsmax that his choice would be a core conservative who is “willing to stand up and fight for the things that I believe in.”
“My principal and only criterion for vice president is to make sure that I have someone that I have confidence that if something should happen to me that they could carry on and do what I promised the people of America I would try to do,” he said.
Gingrich would seem to fit the bill more than any of the other candidates. He and Santorum have been battling for the same voters on the right of the party as they try to defeat front-runner Mitt Romney.
Santorum said the GOP only has to look to history to see that conservative candidates do better in general elections that do moderates.
“If we have another moderate Republican we are going to end up with the same situation we had four years ago,” he said, referring to John McCain’s loss to Barack Obama. “We’ll have the same situation we had with Bob Dole and the same situation we had with Gerry Ford.
“You go back. If we nominate conservatives we win. If we nominate moderates we lose. We can’t afford to lose this one.”
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
Please...
As a Newt voter in Florida... this team wins.
Santorum is more likable.
Newt can still follow Obama around and debate him every day.
Allen West would be more to my liking, but Newt would be a great choice.
Although, I prefer Gingrich as POTUS, I could accept him as VP. One of the responsibilities of VP is to be the bulldog for the president, so it’s a role that would fit Newt like a glove.
I personally dislike Gingrich but think he’s an ideal choice for VP. He has the personality strength to get his policy ideas included in a Santorum administration.
Also they would make the perfect good cop/bad cop team. Santorum could explain policy with a smile while Newt applies the whip in congress.
This has potential.
Those two either need to strike a deal, whereby one convincingly throws their support 100% to the other in exchange for the VP (or some other desired) spot.
For example, Santorum endorses Newt, in exchange for the position of US Trade Representative... (hint hint)
Or both need to run till the very last day.
And trust to a brokered convention.
(unconventional, that)
Well, they had better team up quickly somehow and I don’t really care how is on the top because we do not want Romney to get the nod!
Now we’re talking. Combine Newt’s team with Santorum, we WIN.
Thank you, Rick, now make it happen, don’t just reflect on it.
Other way around skippy, you aren’t seasoned enough...
First, What we need is for the Santorum vs Gingrich bickering to STOP at FR.
I would be happy with Santorum/Gingrich but I would MUCH RATHER HAVE Gingrich/Santorum for 16 year run of conservatism
ROMNEY IS OBAMA-LITE
(and who was that weepy idiot on FoxNews who cried and asked Romney to promise to “take care of his son”)
Santorum/Gingrich is a winner.
RE: Other way around skippy, you aren’t seasoned enough...
16 years in the halls of Washington isn’t seasoned enough?
And I would PAY MONEY to see Gingrich debate Odumbass
This is so incredibly transparent. Gingrich is going in to his best potential states and Santorum knows it. Earlier this week Ricky was urging him to drop out, now he “suggesting” him as a running mate. What an opportunist and that is what his entire political career has been about.
LOLOLOLOL!
See how it works? They say not seasoned...you say 16 years in Congress...they say DC insider.
Santorum is our best chance to beat obama. I would take a Santorum/Gingrich ticket only to stop the conservative infighting so we can train our guns (metaphorically) on Romney abd then obama. We need to come together on this quickly and quit letting the media, the democrats and the romney slime machine keep us at each others throats!
With two Catholics on the ticket, you would lose the Catholic vote.
Newt is an ideas guy, and the best debater the Republicans have. Alan West would be a great VP for Newt.
Maybe the candidates (including Zero) should be made identify their cabinet choices during the primaries. We know the Obama administration is made up of a bunch of losers from academia.
RE: With two Catholics on the ticket, you would lose the Catholic vote.
Interesting. I’d like to know why.... Santorum pretty much has the Evangelical vote sawed up.
Imagine waking up, and on ABC there’s President Santorum talking, over on CSPAN there’s VP Gingrigh talking, and over on Comedy Central there’s zero blubbering on Stewart and again on Colbert. Michelle spends the rest of her days on EllenD.
The world is right again.
It’s true, if we could back our candidates as a solid block I know we’d win. Don’t know how to get there from here but praying it happens.
Newt would be much more useful in a Cabinet position than as VP.
I read Catholics went for Romney. I don’t really know why.
It depends on how those 16 years were spent. He was trained by Arlen Spector, learned to be a “team player” and did far more following than leading.
Evangelicals are one issue voters and Ricky gave them what they wanted.
Shouldn’t this be in breaking?
I would prefer Newt as POTUS, with Santorum at VP, but the other way around just might work. Col. West heads my wish list for Newt’s VP, but maybe he could come onboard as their Secretary of Defense?
Either way, a big BUMP for the two of them beginning to get together to consolidate forces against Romney!
May God give us strength and wisdom.
Tatt
Gingrich won't be going there, Rick.
No they are not one issue voters but there is one issue they will not compromise on...a line in the sand but that does not make them a one issue voter, it just makes the GOP the stupid party because they are willing to play Russian roulette with that issue and let another party scoop up their base, a base that includes most of their foot soldiers during election time.
I guess the rest of the party has no line they will not cross since we have had Bush I, Dole, McCain and now Romney....oh wait, they lost or in Romney's case will lose.
Without your base being happy and energized you lose. Something the GOP leaders are to stupid to figure out.
That is pure bull shit!
If those 2 do not figure a way to work together then we get Romney. Who cares which one is on top of the ticket just team them up.
“ROMNEY IS OBAMA-LITE”
More like Obama-White.
I guess it depends upon what the meaning conservatives is.
It’s fun to speculate. Newt could reply, “You be my VP and I’ll announce that I will step aside for you to take the top slot in ‘16.”
dittos
Those people aren’t Catholics... they are most likely Episcopalians in denial.
Lady Heron is correct, they aren’t one issue votes, they are into identity politics. They are easily led and even more easily led astray.
They put Carter, a good Christian man, into the White House. Liked B.J. Clinton when he walked around, Bible in hand, until they caught him where his willy didn’t belong. They also stayed home and didn’t vote for George H.W. Bush in ‘92. Finally, they supported the Huckster in ‘08.
Someone said it quite well, “We have some very good people in our party but they should leave their theology in the churches.”
compared to McCain he was right.
Newt made similar stupid ‘team’ plays too.
The problem with that type of thinking at this point is that neither one will get a chance to be president if they do not work something out.
If they really want to be in the top political office in the country and are not just in the race to split the conservative vote so Romney can be the chosen one then they need to work it out....TODAY...and who cares who sits on top because if they do a good job the other will get his chance.
Not the first time he’s said it. He said the same thing in a debate last year, although the question was narrowed to only include the candidates up on stage.
BAIER: Again, if you had to choose a running mate, one of the people on the stage with you, who would you choose and why? Thirty seconds down the row.
SANTORUM: And — and I — and I would say that, you know, right now that, you know, the guy that I’m agreeing with most up on stage is probably the guy to my left. So I would say that Newt Gingrich would be the guy that I would — I would pick as someone who — who would follow through with what I’m saying.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2846108/posts
Newt Gingrich: Yes, I’d team up with Santorum to beat Romney
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2828613/posts
I wonder if this couldn’t be the first attempt at uniting against Romney? My immediate impression is that Gingrich (whom I support) has too large an ego to take a backseat to Santorum but he is also smart enough to see the wrting on the wall.
After Alabama and Mississippi (where he has to win in a spectacular fashion) Newt may come to the realization that he needs to settle. He could 1) see Romney destroyed which would certainly put a smile on his face, 2) help beat the daylights out of Obama be in the general and 3) be in a position to make life a living hell for Democrats as VP and push the conservative agenda (being the “spokesperson” on the talking head circuit and presiding over the Senate).
Newt likes a big stage and the VP stage may be the biggest stage he is going to get.
If Newt’s response is a flat out “no” then the deal is off. If Newt says something cagey like “it is too early to talk about folding my campaign” then the tender offer has been accepted and the American people catch a break and will have a couple of decent-enough conservatives in the White House for a change.
I smell victory...
LOL, it's funny because it's true. Catholics prefer to elect Muslims and atheists.
The other problem with your statement is that our founders depended on a citizenship with a strong Judeao/Christian faith to keep our freedoms so leaving your faith at home is stupid. Without a moral population that as individuals keeps themselves in check you lose your freedoms...which is happening daily as we lose our faith foundations. We are being regulated to death.
“It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded ... on the gospel of Jesus Christ.”
—Patrick Henry
“God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure if we have removed their only firm basis: a conviction in the minds of men that these liberties are the gift of God?”
—Thomas Jefferson
“We have staked the future of all of our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind for self-government, upon the capacity of each and all of us ... to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God.”
—James Madison
McCain had better military credentials and a better pro-life record than Mittsky. He also was more honest and less of a flip-flopping opportunist. I never considered Mittsky over McCain for a second in 2008.
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.