Skip to comments.Palin predicts Santorumís rise in Iowa
Posted on 12/02/2011 2:04:41 PM PST by fightinJAG
Sarah Palin, who decided not to run for the White House and has so far been only a bit player in the race, name dropped Rick Santorum in her assessment of the GOP field, saying that he is the candidate who has been most ideologically consistent and will likely start getting a look from conservative voters.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Yes, Iowa is not all that good at predicting the nominee. But it doesn’t hurt to win, I don’t think!
You read too much into that. She is not endorsing Newtie.
So did the panhandler at I-10 and Shepherd Drive.
Do we need his take on things too?
Palin is not endorsing anyone at the moment.
However, her use of the word “consistent” last night as she talked about Santorum was quite noticeable.
Considering the rap on Gingrich, calling another candidate the “most consistent conservative” was saying he was “not Newt.”
People tend to think that because someone recognizes that a candidate is smart, or a good debater, or as having workable solutions is not the end of the story. If the person is too inconsistent to deliver — or so inconsistent that he could completely demoralize and splinter the conservative movement for a while — none of the former means a hill of beans.
Yes, his name was exactly the one I began shifting toward after I learned of Gingrich’s foolish, foolish statement about life beginning at implantation.
Way back in 1995 when a Wisconsin congressman (name escapes me) made some noises about how the Republicans ought to embrace homosexuality as normal and Gingrich signalled that he was prepared to do that, I said to my friends, Gingrich doesn’t “get it” as far as pro-life and sexuality issues are concerned.
I was willing to hold my nose and vote for him, hoping he’d converted in the meantime to a more authentically pro-life and pro-natural sexuality, but that implantation statement raises a huge red flag.
If he clarifies it, if he walks it back, I’ll consider him, but if not, I’ve just about lost patience with him.
Henry Hyde used to say about Newt that he was 1/2 genius and 1/2 insane. That’s always made me leery of him but . . .
Of the remaning candidates, Santorum was the one I was beginning to take a closer look at.
That is what you call a fatally flawed analogy.
Do we need YOUR take on things?
Not really. Mine either. But we’re all here giving our take on things because, well, that’s how things get discussed and evaluated.
Thank you for reminding me of Henry Hyde.
I’ve got less problem with Santorum’s philosophy than with his personality. Sorry, but while he’s had some good moments, my takeaway from his performance at the debates is “he’s a jerk”. YMMV of course.
I’d say Palin’s comment is more of a backhanded reminder that Newt has been all over the map at times than a pre-endorsement of Santorum. Bachmann has also been pretty idologically pure and Palin didn’t mention her...
I think your analysis is very good.
On the “jerk” point, as far as I’ve ever heard about Santorum, he doesn’t have a reputation as a jerk at all, so I figure he’s not a jerk, so I think maybe the coming off as a jerk can be fixed over time.
Not that I saw that as strongly as you did. I was quite impressed with several of his debate performances. He seems to be able to cut right to the point, the principle of the matter, particularly on national security and the big issues.
Maybe if he were not fighting the frustration of always being relegated to the background, his personality would show through in a more favorable light.
Sometimes you are dumber than a box of rocks.
Apologies to the rocks.......
Hey butt seepage......don't call Cain a RINO!
This was hardly an endorsement and more of an analysis. I am commenting on all the people pleasuring themselves thinking that Palin actually endorsed someone.
So, you think Newt will have trouble keeping conservatives on the implantation? Sorry, just couldn't resist. You're correct to see red flags there.
Ive always wanted to ask you this, what the hell is your problem? You come on Palin threads to trash her, what is your beef with her? How come you hate her so much? Seriously, its a relevant question, you say you think she is irrelevant yet all you do is post about her. Do I support her, yes, but at least I post on other threads that have nothing to do with her, all you do is post nasty stuff about her. You sound like one of those Democratic Underground freaks
I like Rick but he better pick up the pace as we are at 32 days and counting.
I don't like her.
How come you hate her so much?
Dislike is not hate.
you think she is irrelevant yet all you do is post about her.
I never said that and I post about other things as well. False and Fail.
all you do is post nasty stuff about her
False and Fail again. Going for a Trifecta?
Get your stuff sorted out, pay attention and get back to me.
Not everyone has to worship the woman. Deal with it.
Hey butt seepage
Nice. I would expect that from a guy from DU, but not a fellow FREEPER. I know this is a tense primary season but sheesh you could just say the rest of your post without being nasty. I know your not a liberal. Sheesh.
Sounded as much like a Ron Paul endorsement as a Rick Santorum endorsement to me.
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.