Posted on 01/13/2012 1:41:53 PM PST by TitansAFC
PPP Poll (SC): Romney 29%, Gingrich 24%, Paul 15%, Santorum 14%
(Excerpt) Read more at publicpolicypolling.com ...
He’s not even on the ballot in Ohio.
A Republican President has to win Ohio to be President.
Santorum is a joke.
OK I apologize if you aren’t a Myth guy. It’s just the idea that a Newt win of ANY magnitude wouldn’tputnhim in the drivers seat is so bizarre that this seemed like the most likely explanation.
Newt wins SC and he’s the conservative alternatiive. It becomes a Myth, Paul, Newt race. I don’t see how Newt doesn’t win that.
Hank
Its called the greater good. Rush is 100% right. What you want a dangerous socialist like Obama to get reelected? Even 50% of what I want is better then Obama, and Romney will give us far more then 50% of what republicans want.
************
My friend, that philosophy is what made a ‘conservative republican” George Bush- the biggest nanny state socialist in American history.
Respectfully, you don’t just get 50% of what you want, the Dem communists get 50% of what they want. If that’s he “greater good”, I leave you and your children to it-— I’m too old. -:) Good luck with your choice. Best, Vin
Because the primary rules have changed, this time the primary is much more like a marathon instead of a sprint. Romney is like the rabbit. The conservative alternative just needs to keep pulling in 2nds and 3rds until April 1st. Hopefully, the conservative field will be down to one or two by then and the conservative alternatives will start picking up the winner take all states and leave Romney in the dust for delegates. Despite all the hoopla, Romney only has 4 delegates to the conservatives 2 and 1 delegate totals.
Aw, the pee-pee poll. Who’s gonna swallow that?!
At this time, Romney is trying to keep it Romney vs the field. That helps Romney, especially in fund-raising, not so much by getting him more but by denying a wide fund-raising appeal to the other candidates in the field.
If Perry, Santorum and Huntsman would quit, Newt has a good chance.... but it has to happen relatively soon.
The real world problem is, if we don’t get a total Conservative candidate... and we take our ball and go home... we help reelect Obama.
The real world problem is, if we don’t get a total Conservative candidate... and we take our ball and go home... we help reelect Obama.
PS If you think 41 was the biggest state socialist in history, then you have forgotten FDR, LBJ and Obummer.
Excellent news. Newt is inching forward and should be ahead of Mitt by election day. That should help Newt in Florida. GO NEWT GO.
The real world problem is, if we don’t get a total Conservative candidate... and we take our ball and go home... we help reelect Obama.
****************
So? I get an admitted socialist, as opposed to a GOP Establishment, One World Gov’t socialist. I don’t see a difference.
As for your PS- yes, FDR, LBJ and BHO did exactly what Democrats do- they tax and spend and create dependency— Regrettably, Bush and the GOP Establishment now do the same-
You see no difference between Romney and Obama? You see a very successful venture capitalist as a “One World Socialist?”
Time to get back on the Thoriazine.
Santorum, Gingrich, and Perry need to all agree to go after Romney only.
I don’t care for how this is shaping up. The conservatives are splitting the damn vote and are going to give Romney a win. I like Perry well enough but he has shown zero movement to the positive so why is he still in this race when he is clearly on his way to tieing John Huntsman? Hell he may even come in last in SC? If he can’t do better in SC with the money and resources he has tell me where he is going to do well outside of Texas? Right now there are two possibilities. Gingrich and Santorum. What conservatives need to do is take the last poll of the race and which ever conservative is ahead vote for them. It is far more important to block Romney in SC than anything thing else. It will become increasingly hard to stop him if he wins SC especially given a media, establishment etc that are feeding a message of inevitability and plenty of dumbass conservatives are falling in line like little robots mezmerized by the desire to back the ‘electable’ candidate as defined by msm. Not many but enough. SC Carolina could be our last battle. Imagine 8 years of Mitt Romney, a Gerald Ford moderate, or the real chance he loses to Obama because he is so weak in his passions and so damaged from his support for his own version of Obamacare and shifting positions.
This is a tragedy. The American people have never been more aligned for the defeat of liberalism than when Reagan beat Carter. Could you imagine if it had been Gerald Ford beating carter, or G HW Bush instead. The conservative asendency would likely not have happenned, the events leading up to 1994 would not have happenned, and 2010 would not have happenned. This isn’t a game folks. There are dire historical consequences at stake if we do not have a fighter who will not only defeat Obama but will further the goals of our goals of returning to founding principles. We do not have a Reagan but we do have a choice. We have individuals who have did impressive conservative things. Newt no matter how flawed accomplished amazing things and moved the ball that helped make possible the conservatism we have today. Santorum also may not have a record of strict fiscal conservatism but he has many conservative accomplishments and he was first elected in the 1994 wave.
The biggest thing I can not understand is how he could’ve supported Arlen Specter for President in 1996. Loyalty is one thing but for a man who holds his principles front and center and would have had a man who was not in the least pro-life for President is difficult to square with the Rick we see now. Rick Perry has a respectable record in Texas and was at the forefront of the Tea Party. Unfortunately he appears to be going no where. Even in SC he is tieing John Huntsman for last in all the polls. Still I’d vote for any of these men and all are better than Romney who gives us absolutely no sense of how he would govern and all we have is his record as a liberal MA gov only slightly more conservative that William Weld.
A vote for Romney is to expect him to govern differently than he has in the only office he held. It is to expect him not to be the compromising ‘uniter’ he was. Not to be the pro gay, pro abortion, fiscal liberal whose greatest claim to fame was passing state run subsidized Health Care which isn’t even fully funded by MA but for which half comes from the federal government and also has not reduced health care costs but appears to have accelerated them to new heights as MA leads the nation in their rise far above the national average. Some have tried to downplay this but one thing is clear is the cost of to privately insured has grown the most just as would happen with Obamacare and that isn’t even considering the cost that the privately insured are paying to keep afloat the subsidized public portion which is also subsized by federal funds.
Read Below-————————————————————————
A new report finds that health care spending in Massachusetts continues to increase, with private payer costs outpacing national health care spending and spending by Medicare and MassHealth — the state’s Medicaid and CHIP program:
“
Spending per privately insured member grew 6 percent from 2007 to 2008 and another 10 percent from 2008 to 2009. This rate of growth was substantially higher than the increase in national personal health care expenditures per capita from 2008 to 2009. In 2009, national personal health care spending per capita increased 4.6 percent—a deceleration from 4.9 percent growth in 2008.
Spending by private payers grew faster than spending by public payers. The rate of growth for spending on privately insured people from 2007 to 2008 also outpaced the growth in spending for Massachusetts residents in Medicare (4.8 percent) or MassHealth (2.8 percent) during the same time period (Figure A). The rates of growth for both private and public payers in Massachusetts continued to outpace increases in per capita state gross domestic product and wages.
“
http://www.mass.gov/eohhs/docs/dhcfp/cost-trend-docs/cost-trends-docs-2011/health-expenditures-report.pdf
Newt has to come in 1st or 2nd, otherwise
he will face a big uphill battle.
He can do it!
Of course you're not - when you post things like this, as you have -
"If Newt cared about anyone other than Newt, he’d have already endorsed Santorum.
Lets just be clear here. Newt would be happy with finishing second if it means Romney wins."
I don't think people will be fooled by your supposed concern...in the first place and your Newt-blasting convoluted statement in the second -
Santorum's a nice guy - but he could never stand up to the obama machine..
Lat night in SC, in the after debate session - he wandered all over the place in his rambling answers. Compare that to Newt'a at the same event...
live link next post - I hope more Freepers got to see this
start at about minute mark 5 - First Newt, then Santorum - quite a contrast. We must remember that this is not just an election as usual. This is an election to save our country. We're not going to get another chance...
live link next post -
start watching at minute marker 5 http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/303686-1
live link per my post above - note also the much higher enthusiasm of the crowd for Newt versus the response on Santorum’s answers
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/303686-1
Newt was winnning - quite handidly in South Carolina just a month ago.
Now he’s not. I’ve never got an explanation for this other than the fact that Newt wilted under the scrutiny.
How is that supposed to give me confidence?
I agree with you that Newt is a more focused speaker and always draws attention. Santorum’s answer to the lady with an out of work husband in his 50’s - 60’s was very broad and did not focus on the very difficult problem related to her particular demographic. The lady said so at the end when Huckabee asked her.
For the gentleman who asked Newt about the Fed, the man said that Newt partially satisfied him when discussing the founding fathers and readiness to fire Bernanke. The gentleman wanted the satisfaction of hearing that the non-constitutional Federal Reserve will be eliminated, and Newt did not take the bait and promise that. The key is restoring our currency and not bailing out everybody and everything including th Euro and Europe. Newt credibly pledged to strengthen our currency. His actions as Speaker of the House give him credibility in his position. His reforms in the 90’s strengthened our dollar and we had great economic growth on Newt’s watch.
Mutt wants to convince us that he is inevitable but the only thing I am convinced of is that the majority of Republicans would prefer someone other rhan him.
Prefer someone other than him, certainly, but the problem is with the kinds of reasoning plenty of people give. In the following examples I can think of plenty of the candidates make me wonder why they bat around the Bush.
1) Bain capital is the problem.
My take: The problem is actually Romney, because he makes his experience with venture capitalism seem fresh when he’s officially been retired from being the CEO of Bain Capital since the end of fiscal year 1999. In other words, over 20 years, how fresh can experience from over twenty years ago be? Practically all experience of his since then has been about running for president, including being governor of MA.
Not all of it is Romney’s substance either, Gingrich failed to effectively plan to collect signatures on the campaign trail, which hurt him, and made him look not so presidential. Same with Rick Perry. If anything, he’s my definition of a politician for life.
With Rick Santorum, he should keep running to raise awareness about Rick Santorum, not every person who doesn’t make it on the original primary should quit so soon. Newt, has plenty of problems, I wouldn’t vote for him unless I had no other choice. Rick on the other hand, has a better moral record, and actually is better in his overall attitude, politically speaking, given how the mentality of politicians compares to the general populace.
What makes me wonder is how Ron Paul ever got anywhere in the primaries. I cannot agree with him on foreign policy. If America is really going to keep attacks off it’s back, it is going to carry a really big stick.
I agree, there are plenty of candidates I would like more, but the part that irks me so much is why we have the set running that we do.
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.