Skip to comments.It is time for Sen. Rick Santorum to drop out
Posted on 01/25/2012 5:10:13 PM PST by TitansAFC
Sen. Rick Santorum has no viable path to victory and brings no new issues or ideas to the table. He no longer serves a purpose, or has a justification to remain in the race.
Santorum has no viable claim that he is more conservative or more electable than Gingrich. He has no viable claim that he will be better in raising money, in organization, or would do a better job as president. There is simply no path for him. Further despite winning Iowa, Santorum lost badly in NH and SC, and has no means to complete in FL. It is time for him to leave.
The Santorum campaign probably thought, prior to SC, that it had a chance to win values voters. SC results show that those voters went to Gingrich over Santorum, despite an all-out values attack against Gingrich. SC should have put an end to that thinking. There simply is no path for Santorum.
It is time for him to drop out. Hopefully to support Gingrich. It is best for Santorum to quit while he is in a respectable position. Now is that time.
Thanks... I will. I like Levin, but seldom ever get to hear his show. The only thing I usually hear is Rush's first hour... then, some Medved or Hugh Hewitt in the evening. I'm a member of RUSH 24, so.. when I'm on the road, I usually catch the rest of Rush's show in the evening.
I haven't seen the other threads here Re: Rush. But, I'm pretty confident in saying Rush is working hard to stay pretty neutral in this primary. I've heard him say plenty of negative things about Romney, and plenty supportive of Newt. Yesterday was no exception. He defended Newt pretty strongly.
The endless supply of progressive and liberal and anti-Reagan things said and DONE - comes from Romney, not Gingrich.
As I posted earlier.... Not matter how troubling the Gingrich quotes are to me (and, they are).. the things Romney is ON VIDEO saying, are far worse. These knocks against Gingrich aren't driving me towards Romney... they are nudging me towards Santorum.. which, is why I was posting on this thread to begin with.
It is rather clear that these are "selected" quotes from Gingrich.. but, there does seem to be quite a few of them. And, I suspect there will be quite a few more.
makes it clear you are a full-fledged Romneybot.
Ok.. THAT made me laugh a little. :-) I suppose, by the standards of this board, I must be a "Romney-bot". I don't like Romney... I wouldn't vote for him in a primary unless it was down to him and Paul... and, even then, I'm not sure. But, I don't fear Romney as the end of the world like most here do.
Frankly.. I don't see THAT much difference between Romney and Newt. To me, they BOTH look like BIG government progressives. Newt even CALLS himself a "progressive"... I take him at his word (even though, mendacity seems to be an issue for him lately)
Newt is definitely more convincing at what he says these days... but, they BOTH are "saying" a lot of what we want to hear. Newt DOES have a record of slowing runaway government spending... but, immediately after he did that, he was shamed from office.. and then, spent the next 10 years lobbying and running around talking about big government ideas like Cap & Trade and government health care. He LIKES the idea of "better, smarter government"... I prefer LESS government.
Newt seems to be able to capture the imagination of the youth of today... with his grandiose rhetoric. That's a good thing. Lord knows, the youth in this country need a big dose of optimism. But, I'm old and jaded... I can't help but think a President Newt will be bad news for CO2 limitation, for immigration reform, and any number of other BIG government, progressive ideas.
The US is bankrupt. The establishment just haven't admitted it yet. The only way to draw us back from the abyss will be to savagely slash federal spending, regulation, and business-unfriendly laws, and to gut union power. If we do so, expect rioting.
Review what happened last year in Wisconsin, and visualize that happening in DC and nationwide. There will be killing in the streets and cities will burn.
What we will need is somebody with the fighting spirit to hold the line through all the insanity. I don't think Santorum has it. I'm positive that Romney doesn't have it. I think Gingrich might have it.
God help us is we have a President who is too chicken to do what's needed in the coming few years.
I agree with you. Up until Tuesday I wasn’t sure if the most principled conservative was ballsy enough for the fight ahead. Santy had the character and consistency, and newt had the mouth and the fight. I was worried because newt doesn’t always use the Force for good!
But last night, even moreso than Tuesday, the consistent, principled one brought out a big steel set. He’s rising to the occasion like I had hoped. He could do this. Sometimes there are two horses neck and neck the whole race and someone else comes past them from the rails.
I was not motivated to vote for Santorum in 2006 as a result.
I don't think that Santorum is a principled conservative. I think he's a fake, and puts up whatever persona he thinks may be useful.
Sorry about the Romneybot crack. You seem like a reasonable person, just cynical about Gingrich actually performing as a small-government conservative if he makes president. I also have my doubts about that, but think Gingrich would respond to Tea Party Person concerns better than any of the rest of them. For any President to actually reduce Federal Government role and spending, it will take both houses of the congress and the people to hold their feet to the fire.
My perception of Limbaugh’s nuanced negative treatment of Gingrich is simply something that does not seem to register with you, and I know it to be true, but if you can’t feel it, well, ok.
Gingrich and Romney equivalent big-government progressives?Not even close.
Amazing that the two oldest candidates seem to be inspiring the youth the most, isn’t it? But Romney isn’t far behind in age - in fact he would be one of the oldest presidents ever elected if he won also. Which brings me to my point: Romney is absolutely certain to do nothing but try to shore up and continue the blue-model of big central government and best social practices of the last 100 years of the progressive method of governing. We are on the cusp a major change, due to the unsustainable debt and obviously occurring breakdown of the current model, recognized by nearly everybody under age 60. Gingrich and Paul see it, and I don’t think Santorum does, and Romney thinks he can stop it. Rather than fretting about what you fear a President Newt might do about for CO2 limitation, immigration reform, and any number of other BIG government, progressive ideas, you can be sure Gingrich knows better than to fight his contituency and the Congress on these issues if he gets elected. He knows the tide has turned.
Gingrich is best equipped to deal with the big changes that are on the way.
No worries... thanks for sticking with the conversation long enough to find out. Lately, that rarely seems to happen on this forum. :-(
As it turns out... it seem the Abrams article DOES INDEED have a number of serious flaws. Levin did a great job of exposing them... and, indeed, Rush piled on today with further information It's a shame: Abrams WAS a person that I thought had integrity... Either he's lost it completely, or was duped by others. I'm embarrassed to admit I bought into it. I should have trusted my own memory and instincts... I didn't recall Newt saying much of anything "anti-Reagan". That's why I was so shocked by it.
Non-issue to me now... except as, further proof of the depths of dirty-politics being played these days.
As for Rush: I've heard the slams he's made agains Newt. I suppose these register more harshly with you than with me. What I hear is... Rush freely speaking his mind, covering reservations and qualms he has about Newt....and other candidates. But, as I said.. he ALSO often says good things about Newt, and about the importance of FULL-THROATED espousal of conservative ideals... When Rush says that, I ALWAYS assume he's talking about Newt, not Mitt.
I 100% agree with you about the seriousness of the change that is before us... It's the strongest case you make: Newt being the "most capable" of dealing with it. Despite my doubts... I have to admit that this is true.