Posted on 01/11/2014 10:13:11 AM PST by Drew68
I supported Newt Gingrich in the primaries. When he spoke on the campaign trail, I agreed with every word he said. I also knew in my heart that his name would never be at the top of the ticket. Why? because outside of the FR cheerleading section, people loath him, women especially. They loath his wife. He is old. His voice is grating. He is perpetually angry. He is uninspiring. Gingrich has great ideas and a brilliant mind. Unfortunately, he is wholly unelectable. He might make a great policymaker behind the scenes but he has no future in elective politics, not nationally anyways.
You see, there are these people out there we call "low information voters". They don't care about policies. They vote for personalities. Unfortunately for our republic, their votes count just the same as yours and mine. This is why a successful politician needs to be the complete package of policies and personality. Gingrich had one but lacked the other.
Completely disagree. Obama prevailed because he had the press carry his water by hiding just how awful the economy was (misrepresenting how much unemployment there really is and not disclosing what Obamacare had in store for EVERYONE). And also by the GOPe running a moderate Republican. Again. Yay, milquetoast.
Works for the Democrats.
Republicans should start talking about the cliff we're approaching. They should start really pointing out the example of Detroit:
You notice Detroit? That's what happens after decades of Democrat mismanagement. They are bankrupt. City employees will get pennies on the dollar for their pension benefits.This is where the US is heading if we don't change.
A strong private sector is necessary for the US to be able to pay pensions, to keep Social Security viable, and for us to be able to continue to provide a safety net for the poor. We need to stop making it so hard for businesses to operate here!
Make it clear even to the welfare class, that they will NOT like their lives if we go over that cliff.
Santorum is talking about the establishment GOP, whose efforts are directed at managing political issues on political terms , only. For instance, I once approached Kirby Wilbur, the then head of the WA State GOP, about the high cost of new SEIU contracts and the state budget. Wilbur told me that if I was so concerned with it, I should write my own initiative to present at the convention because the Republicans were not interested. Others told me that the unions were ready to support Republicans if Republicans would only support union issues, so that is what the WA Republicans were going to do. They weren’t interested in the real impact of their policies, only in winning elections. It has been a down hill slide for WA Republicans ever since.
Sorry Eva, your one off issue example 2600 miles from Santorum’s home state is not going to excuse RS for this pablum…if he was talking about the GOP e, which he is at least a part time member of, then he said it poorly.
Nice.
I agree.
What works for libs is the opposite of what will work for conservatives….think a polaroid negative…..they cannot let people know what they stand for, we MUST let them know.
It does. *sigh*
Of course he said that…..he couldn’t message like Newt or Limbaugh or Steyn on his most morning wood fantasy day….
Yeah, that hole in the boat thing was weak, bizarre…
How do you attract the vote of people who just want “Free Sh#t”?
Small government people (fiscal conservatives) and moral people (social conservatives) are the same people. I implied something different in my previous comment, was that was mere clumsiness on my part.
You know, there are a number of ways to drive a wedge between the Left and their so-called constituencies. We have surrendered.
Imagine if 90% of the professors at our universities were registered Republicans. Would the Democrats stand for that?
Look at how our K-12th grade schools are being gamed by the Left. If Republicans were gaming things in reverse, would the Left stand for it?
I’ll bet that if you polled government jobs, you’d find out that over 90% of them are Democrats.
Diversity? LOL, the Democrats are the worst offenders.
Call them on it. Get some form of parity in place.
Don’t let our next generation kids get educationally and propagandizedly lobotomized by the left.
Rick Santorum is part of the problem, not the solution.
He is good on Social Issues, and horrible on limited, small-government issues and the proper role of government according to the Founders.
I believe that personal responsibility and accountability are enhanced when government is small and people have to stand on their own two feet or die.
Rick Santorum may not be both socially and fiscally conservative. I would argue that if he is fiscally Liberal, than he is also probably far less "socially conservative" than he might want to believe. Big Government people are inherently enablers of bad behavior.
This is going to be a challenge. Entitlement cuts are popular in the abstract. The problem is people want these cuts to happen to only those programs they don't use. Cut food stamps, cut welfare, but don't you dare touch my child tax credit!
Santorum was anti Reagan and pro-abortion until his first political campaign (1990), in 1996 he campaigned for “Arlen Specter for President”, on a platform to make the GOP remove prolife from the partly platform.
In 2004 Santorum supported Specter, and then mumbled explanations to criticism of it, but it turns out that Santorum continued supporting Specter in 2010, until Specter finally switched parties and returned the money.
If you abandon social conservatism, government fills the void, and you get big government. You cannot separate the two. For years I believed it was possible, but I was wrong.
100% true
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.